The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 7 ( 2018 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Miniscrew Composition, Transmucosal Profile, and Cortical Bone Thickness: A Three-dimensional Finite-element Analysis of Stress Fields

Orlando Motohiro Tanaka, Joana EG Yépez, Renata M Marangon, Armando Y Saga, Key F de Lima

Keywords : Dental implants, Finite-element method, Orthodontic anchorage procedures

Citation Information : Tanaka OM, Yépez JE, Marangon RM, Saga AY, de Lima KF. Miniscrew Composition, Transmucosal Profile, and Cortical Bone Thickness: A Three-dimensional Finite-element Analysis of Stress Fields. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (7):881-887.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2351

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 00-07-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to use the finite-element method (FEM) to analyze the stress fields generated in miniscrews (MSs) and surrounding bone on applying a force perpendicular to the MS according to variations in the cortical bone thickness and changes in the transmucosal profile length and MS composition. Materials and methods: Miniscrews with stainless steel (SS) and titanium alloy mechanical properties with a 1 to 2 mm transmucosal profile inserted in bone blocks with cortical bone of varying thickness (1 and 2 mm) were three-dimensionally modeled using computer-aided design (CAD) and examined using FEM. A 3.5 N force perpendicular to the long axis of the MS was applied in the four mechanical tests: EM1: SS MS and a 1 mm transmucosal profile; EM2: titanium MS and a 1 mm transmucosal profile; EM3: SS MS and a 2 mm transmucosal profile; and EM4: titanium MS and a 2 mm transmucosal profile. Results: The stress distributions in all mechanical tests were highest at the MS, especially at the MS–cortical bone interface. A greater stress concentration occurred in cortical bone measuring 1 mm thick than in the cortical bone measuring 2 mm thick. The MSs with a 2 mm transmucosal profile showed higher stress than those with a 1 mm transmucosal profile. Conclusion: The titanium alloy MSs showed higher stress fields and deflection voltages than the SS MSs at the same cortical bone thickness and with the same transmucosal profile. Clinical significance: From a mechanical perspective, this study showed the stress field generated in MSs with SS and titanium alloy (Ti) mechanical properties and surrounding bone. The stress distribution was concentrated at the MS, mainly at the interface with the cortical bone, and the difference between the stress values for the Ti and SS MSs was very small. Under this condition, the two types of MSs are suitable for orthodontic applications because their yield limits are much higher.


PDF Share
  1. da Cunha AC, Marquezan M, Lima I, Lopes RT, Nojima LI, Sant'Anna EF. Influence of bone architecture on the primary stability of different mini-implant designs. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2015 Jan;147(1):45-51.
  2. Brettin BT, Grosland NM, Qian F, Southard KA, Stuntz TD, Morgan TA, Marshall SD, Southard TE. Bicortical vs monocortical orthodontic skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofac 2008 Nov;134(5):625-635.
  3. Deguchi T, Takano-Yamamoto T, Kanomi R, Hartsfield J, Roberts W, Garetto L. The use of small titanium screws for orthodontic anchorage. J Dent Res 2003 May;82(5):377-381.
  4. Salmória KK, Tanaka OM, Guariza-Filho O, Camargo ES, de Souza LT, Maruo H. Insertional torque and axial pull-out strength of mini-implants in mandibles of dogs. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2008 Jun;133(6):e715-e790.
  5. Cha JY, Kil JK, Yoon TM, Hwang CJ. Miniscrew stability evaluated with computerized tomography scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2010 Jan;137(1):73-79.
  6. Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Maceri F, Vairo G. Stress-based performance evaluation of osseointegrated dental implants by finite-element simulation. Simul Model Pract Theory 2008 Sep;16(8):971-987.
  7. Natali A, Pavan PG. A comparative analysis based on different strength criteria for evaluation of risk factor for dental implants. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 2002 Apr;5(2):127-133.
  8. Lin TS, Tsai FD, Chen CY, Lin LW. Factorial analysis of variables affecting bone stress adjacent to the orthodontic anchorage mini-implant with finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2013 Feb;143(2):182-189.
  9. Zienkiewicz, OC.; Taylor, RL. Finite element method. Vol. 1. Oxford: The Basis. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000.
  10. Proffit, WR.; Fields, HW.; Sarver, DM. Contemporary orthodontics. 5th ed. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier; 2013. p. 768.
  11. Jones M, Hickman J, Middleton J, Knox J, Volp C. A validated finite element method study of orthodontic tooth movement in the human subject. J Orthod 2001 Mar;28(1):29-38.
  12. Kojima Y, Fukui H. A numerical simulation of tooth movement by wire bending. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2006 Oct;130(4):452-459.
  13. Suzuki A, Masuda T, Takahashi I, Deguchi T, Suzuki O, Takano-Yamamoto T. Changes in stress distribution of orthodontic miniscrews and surrounding bone evaluated by 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2011 Dec;140(6):e273-e280.
  14. Popov, EP.; Balan, TA. Beam statics. In: Popov EP, editor. Engineering mechanics of solids. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1998. pp. 267-273.
  15. Largura LZ, Argenta MA, Sakima MT, Camargo ES, Guariza- Filho O, Tanaka OM. Bone stress and strain after use of a miniplate for molar protraction and uprighting: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2014 Aug;146(2):198-206.
  16. Ammar HH, Ngan P, Crout RJ, Mucino VH, Mukdadi OM. Three-dimensional modeling and finite element analysis in treatment planning for orthodontic tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2011 Jan;139(1):e59-e71.
  17. Sivamurthy G, Sundari S. Stress distribution patterns at mini-implant site during retraction and intrusion–a threedimensional finite element study. Prog Orthod 2016 Jan;17:4.
  18. Pacheco AA, Saga AY, de Lima KF, Paese VN, Tanaka OM. Stress distribution evaluation of the periodontal ligament in the maxillary canine for retraction by different alveolar corticotomy techniques: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016 Jan;17(1):32-37.
  19. Popov, EP.; Balan, TA. Engineering mechanics of solids. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1999. p. 864.
  20. Hoste S, Vercruyssen M, Quirynen M, Willems G. Risk factors and indications of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices: a literature review. Aust Orthod J 2008 Nov;24(2):140-148.
  21. Jasmine MI, Yezdani AA, Tajir F, Venu RM. Analysis of stress in bone and microimplants during en-masse retraction of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth with different insertion angulations: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2012 Jan;141(1):71-80.
  22. Liu TC, Chang CH, Wong TY, Liu JK. Finite element analysis of miniscrew implants used for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2012 Apr;141(4):468-476.
  23. Nova MF, Carvalho FR, Elias CN, Artese FG. A 3-D finite element study of the stress in the mini-screw and surrounding bone according to the transmucosal profile, cortical bone thickness and mini-screw composition. Rev Dent Press Ortodon Ortop Facial 2008;13:76-87.
  24. Pithon MM, Figueiredo DS, Oliveira DD. Mechanical evaluation of orthodontic mini-implants of different lengths. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013 Mar;71(3):479-486.
  25. Askeland, DR.; Fulay, PP.; Wright, WJ. The science and engineering of materials. 6th ed. Stamford (CT): Cengage Learning; 2003. p. 944.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.